GTX 680 vs. something new for 1080p

Slobo_

Commendable
Jun 27, 2016
5
0
1,510
I'm gaming at 1080p for now, with no plans to upgrade.
The graphics card is a GTX 680, and I'm wondering what to upgrade to without spending a bunch of money, since I only occasionally play PC games.
Some of my options are used/clearance 970/980/980Ti, or the new 1070.
I know the 1070 will be overkill, but I also like the idea of having a shiny new card.
I can afford any of these cards, but I really don't want to since it's only 1080p and not too often.
 

sleepybp

Distinguished
Oct 24, 2010
123
0
18,710
+1 on that RX 480....
But me thinks the Green Nvidia pull is strong in this one ;)
honestly how can some people list off 6 possible cards and not ever mention another brand but nvidia.
You guys keep this funny business up and see how awesome it will be if AMD goes bankrupt.... Nvidia will have no competition and charge whatever the hell they like, slower product release cycles , etc

Want to know what a monopoly does for the tech sector? Look at Intel cpu performance gains over the last 5 years: Nearly unnoticeable to gamers since Sandy Bridge 5 years ago. Why? Bc AMD has not been competitive in cpus, so instead of intel increasing performance they are only focusing on power saving efficiency to gain mobile/laptop sales

Full disclosure: I always buy bang for buck mid range. Going from gtx 770 to RX 480 when the aftermarket boards come out mid july
 
1) The cost of the RX-480 is unknown, and the MSRP is only a guideline. I'd get the 8GB version anyway (MSRP $230USD) though pricing in the real world is probably going to be $260 to $300 on launch.

This also assumes a good CPU to minimize bottlenecks. Generally a heavily overclocked i5-2xxx, stock i5-4590 or similar doesn't affect the average value a great deal.

Any AMD CPU is going to be much more prone to bottleneck a game, though it varies a lot on the game. Even an RX-4300 might have minimal bottleneck in some games but an i5-6600K will be as much as 60% faster in some games when paired with a good GPU.

2) GTX1080 is roughly 2.5X the performance of the GTX680 on average. It will be faster at times and slower at other times depending on the game.

3) GTX1080 VR peformance will be up to 1.6X (probably a bit more later) compared to GTX900 and previous due to SMP's allowing a single-pass rendering for both images (left and right eye).

*We do NOT know how AMD handles this. It may have something similar, or it may not have this feature and fall even further behind. Since the GTX1080 is about 70% faster already then 1.6X then it might be as much as 3X faster for VR titles compared to the RX-480!!

So may want to wait for more info on that.

4) GTX1070 is about 82% as fast as the GTX1080. For some reason it's more impressive to say the GTX1080 is 22% faster on average.

5) NVidia has cool features like Ansel (2D and 3D snapshots), multi-monitor correction (for monitor placement) though these and VR enhancements rely on a PLUGIN which should become popular but just note it doesn't help current titles (though some may get this added retroactively).

6) RX-480 is about 50% faster than the GTX680, though faster still in future DX12 titles but still it's not a massive upgrade from what you have already.

20FPS game now runs at 30FPS on RX-480.
20FPS game now runs at 50FPS on GTX1080.

Summary:
So there's a lot of pros and cons, and of course we don't have all the AMD information yet.

Wait a while until prices settle.

If you had a lower tiered card now I'd say the RX-480 sounds great, but part of buying a new GPU is having a big boost to what you have already.
 

StormBrew

Distinguished
Nov 30, 2014
559
0
19,360


Honestly, I don't understand the hype behind VR. I'm not going to be using it unless I have a full setup for it.
That includes the headset, and tools to use it (such as the Virtuix Omni). At the end of it, if i'm spending nearly $500+ on VR equipment, I'm most likely going to have a beefy PC to match.
 

sleepybp

Distinguished
Oct 24, 2010
123
0
18,710
6. Your Crazy (photon boy)


"6) RX-480 is about 50% faster than the GTX680, though faster still in future DX12 titles but still it's not a massive upgrade from what you have already.

20FPS game now runs at 30FPS on RX-480.
20FPS game now runs at 50FPS on GTX1080."

He said he is gaming at 1080P. Your estimate in going from 20fps on a 680 to 30 fps on an RX 480 @ 1080P seems quite odd. the 480 is supposed to perform similar to 980 so thats 2 generations improvement from 680 to 780 to 980. If he was gaming at 1440P or higher the 1070 would be a great recommendation, but at 1080P the RX 480 is going to be the sweet spot for nearly half the price.
 
Other:
I should add there are several 1080p titles that can benefit from a GTX1080. Getting 60FPS on max/ultra at 1080p doesn't always happen and games will only get more demanding (and you may upgrade your monitor).

I also like asynchronous monitors, so despite the RX-480 not being a huge upgrade over the GTX680, the combination of RX-480 and a good Freesync monitor (i.e. 1440p, 144Hz) is excellent.

You generally don't need the FPS to be as high if using an asynchronous monitor, and of course a higher res, larger screen makes a big difference overall to the experience.

$550USD roughly gets you an Asus, 2560x1440, IPS, Freesync monitor
http://pcpartpicker.com/product/c298TW/asus-monitor-mg279q

(Flat out avoid any Freesync monitor that has less than 2.5X the max/min ratio. For example, 30Hz to 75Hz is okay, but 40Hz to 75Hz is not. 30Hz to 60Hz is not. 40 or 30Hz to 144Hz is amazing.

the reason for the 2.5X ratio is that there is no module like GSYNC so the GPU driver has to resend a frame to ensure you stay in asynch mode. Like dropping to 29FPS gives you "58FPS" though while still 29 individual frames they are still SMOOTH, with minimal latency and no screen tearing.)

PRICING?
If we assume at least $250 for an RX-480 8GB, and $550 for this monitor we are up to $800+, so it's a lot of money though it's not far off the GTX1080.

The experience going to a 144Hz, 1440p, Freesync panel paired with an RX-480 is in most cases going to be much better than a GTX1080 with a typical 1080p monitor.

*lots of games look much better at 2560x1440, and may also not need more than a GTX680 anyway for a mostly solid 60FPS experience. CIV5, Diablo 3, Starcraft 2 etc (mainly games with small text and/or small units).
 

Slobo_

Commendable
Jun 27, 2016
5
0
1,510
Personal preference. I do prefer Nvidia, and no, my purchase alone is unlikely to bankrupt or enrich any one tech giant. I'm just one guy with 2 little kids and extremely little time to indulge in a bit of gaming.
 

Slobo_

Commendable
Jun 27, 2016
5
0
1,510
Let's not worry about bottlenecks, as I have an i7-6700k, 16GB DDR4 RAM, Samsung 950 Pro, etc...
Also, not upgrading the monitors, so 1080p 60Hz it is. Just a workstation with a capability for some gaming.
 

sleepybp

Distinguished
Oct 24, 2010
123
0
18,710
Good point about the monitors. If the prices are similar, than being able to game at 1440p on a new freesync monitor sounds much better than having an overkill gtx 1080 for only 1080p. I may very well use this idea myself, getting an RX 480 mid july and freesync 1440p near xmas when prices hopefully lower. Thanks for the idea photonboy
 

StormBrew

Distinguished
Nov 30, 2014
559
0
19,360


Ok, first of all, who in their right mind would by a 1440p 144Hz monitor for Diablo 3? If he was to seriously invest in a 1440p 144hz monitor, of course he would buy a 1080. The point, is that OP wants a card for 1080P gaming.

The RX480, for the money, is the best 1080p card that will be on the market.
Buy the 1070 if you want all out maxed out 1080p at over 100 frames on nearly every game.
Buy the RX480 if you are on a budget, or don't need the extra power.
Like it has been stated, the RX480 is coming at nearly half the price of a 1070 right now.

Your choice OP, but don't purchase cards off of hypothetical scenarios which you may never use.
 

Slobo_

Commendable
Jun 27, 2016
5
0
1,510


Thanks. Yes, I have a couple of 1080p monitors which I'm not about to upgrade as gaming is not my primary concern. They also top out at 60Hz, so I just want something that will keep the framerate pegged at 60fps on whatever game I should choose.
Also, VR has never occured to me to try, so that hypothetical scenario is out too.